For a 1st round pick.

Why can't we make a trade like that?

It was just reported on NFL Network.

I finnally have the channel.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2013 03:06PM by samsam3738.

WOW that is weird.... Well it was Holmgren who drafted him, but trading away the #3 overall pick for what surely will be a lower 1st rd pick is a bit odd.... I guess new staff, new personnel plans...

Samsam- to be honest I dont have any desire to draft or give up a 1st rd pick for a running back...

-----------------------------------------------------------------
All things are subject to interpretation whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.
Nietzsche

I think we finish with a better record than Indy. If Cleveland agreed with that notion then we probably would have had to TOP the colts offer.

Even so, I'd rather save that pick for the o-line and give Miller a shot.

Is he all that much better than Ahmad Bradshaw?

Yes he's a beast and would have been a nice pickup for us

I think the Browns got the better of it....He is ok but nothing special. averaging 50 yards a game so far...ZERO Td's 3.5 yards per carry career.

Sounds like they are gearing up for a new QB next year.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Sounds like they are gearing up for a new QB next
> year.


If they are, in my opinion, they are unlikely to be getting the first quarterback in the draft because I don't think the Colts are going to have that bad of a record.

No but the Browns still own their own 1sr rounder. They may be battling with Jax for number 1.

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

Tanking for Teddy?

Nice. lol

Or "Boyd or bust".

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

"Mediocre for Manziel"

Clownin for Clowney?

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

SamSam old friend, i'm the absolute worst guy to correct anybody on spelling or grammar, but is there any way you can change the heading of this post to "acquire" please. That is all



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2013 06:49AM by dolphaholic.

Hahah...I've noticed a few people could also use some brush up on....


Then
The word then usually relates to time. It is most commonly used as an adverb. It has the following meanings:


Than
The word than introduces a comparison. It is most often seen with comparatives and words like more, less and fewer.


Don't even get me started on there, their and they're...your and you're

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

Looks like the Browns and Jaguars will finally get a good QB next season. I'm surprised by the Browns, they are not too bad..just needed a little more offense and that team would have been alright.

toko34 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Looks like the Browns and Jaguars will finally get
> a good QB next season. I'm surprised by the
> Browns, they are not too bad..just needed a little
> more offense and that team would have been
> alright.

Looks that way toko.


But the Browns are just doing what most smart GM's and coaches do when they take over a new team.

They are getting rid of the players from the previous regime who do not fit their system or philosophy.

I applaud them for getting someone to cough up a 1st round pick for a complimentary offensive piece.

I don't mean to get picky but, the word is "acquire"

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THE Truth Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > But the Browns are just doing what most smart
> GM's
> > and coaches do when they take over a new team.
>
> .............................
> >
> > I applaud them for getting someone to cough up
> a
> > 1st round pick for a complimentary offensive
> > piece.
>
>
> The number 3 OVERALL PICK in the draft is just a
> "complimentary offensive piece"????????
>
> Have I missed something or O. J. Simpson in his
> prime playing on the Browns roster and starting
> ahead of Richardson and Richardson just spells him
> now and then???????????
>
> Now if you wanna say that Richardson has not
> performed as expected and the trade was good from
> the Browns standpoint given that, then I will not
> argue with you. I have not followed him to be
> frank.
>
> But how STUPID is it to say that he was just a
> "complimentary offensive piece"? Complimentary to
> what???


Thanks for saving me some time Chyren, I thought I was gonna have to do a search to see who was pounding the drum for us to draft T-Rex that year

Not me. I didn't want us to draft Trent. I wanted us to trade back even from 8 and.............well, that would start another fight.

The reason for my post was trying to figure out how to the Browns, Trent was just a "complimentary" player. Perhaps you would like to explain that for Truth, holic?

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The reason for my post was trying to figure out
> how to the Browns, Trent was just a
> "complimentary" player. Perhaps you would like to
> explain that for Truth, holic?


Nope, just saw an opportunity to bust your chops a bit, not my argument to make

dolphaholic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChyrenB Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > THE Truth Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > But the Browns are just doing what most smart
> > GM's
> > > and coaches do when they take over a new
> team.
> >
> > .............................
> > >
> > > I applaud them for getting someone to cough
> up
> > a
> > > 1st round pick for a complimentary offensive
> > > piece.
> >
> >
> > The number 3 OVERALL PICK in the draft is just
> a
> > "complimentary offensive piece"????????
> >
> > Have I missed something or O. J. Simpson in his
> > prime playing on the Browns roster and starting
> > ahead of Richardson and Richardson just spells
> him
> > now and then???????????
> >
> > Now if you wanna say that Richardson has not
> > performed as expected and the trade was good
> from
> > the Browns standpoint given that, then I will
> not
> > argue with you. I have not followed him to be
> > frank.
> >
> > But how STUPID is it to say that he was just a
> > "complimentary offensive piece"? Complimentary
> to
> > what???
>
>
> Thanks for saving me some time Chyren, I thought I
> was gonna have to do a search to see who was
> pounding the drum for us to draft T-Rex that
> year


Lol...I knew he wouldn't understand and that he'd flip out over that comment. He was banging the drum for us to take Mark Ingram in 2011 over a guy like Pouncey or even a QB.

CB loves him some RB's. He thinks its still 1972 and that you can't win in the NFL without drafting a RB early in the draft.

Still hasn't figured out that tying up big cash in that position keeps you from winning these days and that RB is a complimentary pice to the passing game, without which you cant win at all.



Lol...

LOL. To me, when you do this, as Cleveland has, it means either one of three things,

a) you f*cked up when you used the number 3 overall pick in the draft and chose him

or

b) you are NOW f*cking up by trading him for the other team's next year number 1

or

c) the greatest football player in HISTORY is coming out of the college ranks next year at a position at which your team absolutely sucks but would be an instant SuperBowl contender if you chose that guy and that no. 1 will guarantee you get that guy.

Hint: I wouldn't bet any money on no. 3 being at play here.

In any event, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning of the pompous Mr. Truth.

The shorten version of my above post is that Truth thinks Cleveland made a brilliant move (and by implication the Colts GOT TAKEN) and I think that either they screwed up when they chose Trent Richardson no. 3 in the draft or they are screwing up now by trading him for Indy's no. 1 next year which with Luck probably won't be that high.........err... I should say with Luck AND RICHARDSON.

Reggie was our our only weapon on offense. lol...so he was a weapon by default.

It was the old GM who drafted TR so the new regime may not see him as a primo RB...and with good reason. Word is out of Cleveland that TR is a little more dinged up than most realized and he probably won't hold up long....plus he is nothing special.

And YES the Browns DID screw up by drafting him! They should have taken Tannehill. Instead of TR and Weeden they could have had Tannehill and Doug Martin. Now that's a couple players you can build an offense around!

.....................................................................................
“I'm here" You're welcome!" - Kenny Powers

Okay, eesti, I can accept that.

That's my only point. Either they screwed up then or they're screwing up now. Brilliance has nothing to do with it.

But Truth defends every decision made by it seems every management. He is a pathological as*kisser.

I'm no Trent Richardson defender, I just know that it's unnatural to trade away your number 1 draft pick of the draft before last for the number 1 draft pick of a team that's not really that bad.

eesti Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reggie was our our only weapon on offense.
> lol...so he was a weapon by default.
>
> It was the old GM who drafted TR so the new regime
> may not see him as a primo RB...and with good
> reason. Word is out of Cleveland that TR is a
> little more dinged up than most realized and he
> probably won't hold up long....plus he is nothing
> special.
>
> And YES the Browns DID screw up by drafting him!
> They should have taken Tannehill. Instead of TR
> and Weeden they could have had Tannehill and Doug
> Martin. Now that's a couple players you can build
> an offense around!


Exactly eesti. The old Browns front office screwed up taking him that high. The new front office did a great job getting value for a mistake. Indy overpaid for a good young player that they don't need and could have replaced in next years draft with a 2nd or 3rd round pick while keeping that #1 to build an oline to keep Luck on his feet.


In today's day and age, taking ANY RB that high is a mistake. Because RB's are disposable in the NFL these days and nobody wants to pay them $10m a year after their rookie deal is up. Why use a top pick on a guy you aren't going to pay top money too in his 2nd contract?

Its bad business.

Its one thing if RB is the last piece of your puzzle and you are picking in the last 1/3rd of the 1st round. But taking a RB in the first 20 or so picks of the draft is a wasted pick. You can get a back who is just as good, or better, in the 2nd or 3rd round of just about every draft.

Look at Adrian Peterson. He's the best back on the planet by a mile. Hasn't won much without a QB. Then look at the teams that have won Super Bowls the last 10 years...almost all have exceptional QB's and none have highly drafted RB's carrying their offense.

Look at it this way (using your scenario)...if you are a GM and you have two star players from a draft and $12 Mill to spend in cap space to re-sign one of them:

Are you going to give that $12m to Ryan Tannehill and draft a RB next year to replace Doug Martin? Or are you going to give Martin $10M a year and go bargain shopping for your new QB?

Anyone who would go with the RB option is living in the 1970's and doesn't understand the way today's game is set up.